am i the only person who is still not sure when a person is counted as daily winner and when not?
A person will get the daily winner bonuses if their guild wins the daily battle against another guild. At this point, everyone in the winning guild will get the daily win bonuses (seal and XP buff)
EDIT: Trying to explain it more clearly:
This is from Sneak Peak II
I’m going to assume that the guild the player is a part of is Sparkle Ponies.
So after Day 1, Sparkle Ponies beat Sith Lords, so for 24 hours every member of Sparkle Ponies will have the +50% xp buff, and get the 50 seals.
After Day 2, Sparkle Ponies lost to SHADOWHUNTERS, so every member of SHADOWHUNTERS will get the xp buff and the seals, and the members of Sparkle Ponies will lose their xp buff when the 24 hours from the first day expires.
Day 3 is still in progress, but assuming Sparkle Ponies does win (as they are currently doing), they will get another 24 hour xp buff, and more seals.
Hopefully that helps clear it up?
yes very helpful
now to proceed with questions, does it mean the respective guilds Sith Lords and Shadowhunters were fighting back?
if not, what was the victory condition? a point treshhold?
if the guilds were fighting back, how are guild selections done? does it mean we dont get to choose enemy guild we are going to fight against?
I assume both guilds attack each other, and the guild that racks up the most points in their attacks win. (Worth noting that each day has a colour, which can affect the amount points you get). So on Day 1 Sparkle Ponies managed 140,881 points compared to Sith Lords’ 101,527, meaning Sparkle Ponies wins.
All the guild match-ups are decided on the first day (the day of rest that Sirrian mentioned)
hmm if we dont get to target specific guilds, rivalry will be very limited and a portion of guild war flavor will be missing
i mean normally there is slim chance that both guilds would want to target one another, so its either neither guild can target or they can target but then guild doesnt fight back…
I believe the matchmaking will be based upon the guild’s over all ranking in Guild Wars. So the teams at the top will more often than not fight each other. Rankings are adjusted each week based upon your guilds performance for that week. Though we’re still waiting for more information on the rankings side of things.
i hope guild leader will have at least a minimal influence on the matchmaking (if not specific, maybe choose: “easy” “medium” or “hard” type of enemies, while the actual enemies would be choosen by system?)
i mean it would be more fun to have some kind of control over this especially if indeed:
Which will be given to the same guilds that have been dominating the current lists just becaus they consist of 30 nolifers who play the game 24/7 lol.
My guess would be no, since it would require the guild master to be online the day before matchmaking is done. My guess is that you will be matched with a guild that is +/- 5 ranks from you, or something like that. The assumption is that if you are higher you “should” win, so the reward is slightly slower if you do, but if you’re fighting a guild higher than you the assumption is that you “should” lose, and so if you do win, you get a bigger increase for the upset.
In a perfect world every guild would be able to beat all the guilds lower than them 100% of the time. Now of course this will never be achieved, but that is what the system strives to achieve, which is why fighting higher rank guilds will push you further up the rankings.
@Sirrian has mentioned that ALL participating guilds will get the rewards, just that the higher rank ones will get more of them. So no one will miss out on the troops. The top guilds will just get them to mythic sooner. (which likely won’t matter too much if they are similar to guild guardians, but the debate on this has already been hashed out further up)
the problem may raise if one of the guild war units will be needed to proceed more magic bonuses, or in general the 3x stat bonuses - in such cases the top guilds that wil and unlock the 3x will keep on winning more with the bonuses, creating small wall between the 2x and 3x players
but i wont be too worried until i see the actual numbers on how many cards are distributed to how many guilds
@Rasper already showed much earlier in this thread that one copy of a Guild War troop will be just as effective at getting new Kingdom Power levels as getting it to Mythic (assuming every new Kingdom launches with 8 Troops).
Small correction, the insignificant number was 4155 (it was me who posted that thread).
True, so for what it is worth (not much), when I started my guild about a month and a half ago, I seem to remember the start rank was something with 18k.
I have no statistical data, but I can give my impression after working the ranks from 18k up to current 4k.
Very rarely has a guild over 10 members. I would say the huge majority of low-ranked guilds have 1-5 members, a few even 0. Once in a while there is a low-ranked guild with over 20 members.
Around rank 4k most guilds have reached the max member limit (30), but the big majority of guilds still have a single-digit number of members.
I looked at the 50 guilds from rank 4003-4052:
Members - Number of guilds
Only 12 of the 50 guilds have max-member lower than 30.
35 of the 50 guilds have less than 10 members.
Average is 9.09, but the 6 full guilds are pushing that number.
Median is only 4 (27 of the 50 guilds have 4 or less members)
Haha I was wondering why my text was bigger. I chalked it up to a “my post is short so they tried to fit it to one line”. Didn’t even notice the hashtag disappeared.
Learned something new!
It’s further complicated by the fact that on this board, it’s not a hashtag, it’s markup. Specifically, it makes
#huge bold text!
@Lun basically took the answer out of my mouth but to me, it comes down to whether or not you want to count the large contingent of guilds that actually aren’t guilds at all. Like 80% of all the guilds that exist aren’t even trying.
So while it may seem like #31 has much more in common with #3 than with #300, there’s such a wide gap (in terms of perception if not performance) between #3 and #31 that there’s no way you could lump my guild in with the real top guilds.
If that were the case, players wouldn’t be using us as a stepping stone to get to those top guilds.
Yeah and let’s not act like guilds that are lower than the top 100 are even on the radar(just being honest), and then you have a subset within the top 100 of who is actually active enough to qualify.
I mean that’s just truth. If you’re a guild below top 100, you’re either a guild that just started out or you fall under not active enough.
I mean I believe we’re getting to a place where the top 200-250 are active, as I’ve spoke about, but it’s taking time to build up. Guild Wars could help move that along faster though.
My guess is that some of the 1-member guilds might be players who want to play alone (not in a guild), and then make their own guild to get at least a little bit of bonus.
From my viewpoint: I hope things are mixed up a bit more than that. It’s bad enough that most of my PvP matches are against members of the same five guilds, who almost all play soul-destroying BD/Courage meta annoying defences (makes me wonder if it’s their policy). I wouldn’t welcome the extra 30 matches a week (or eating 30 of my PvP matches depending on play-time) being dedicated to those same opponents.
In most sport leagues, the top teams don’t play each other constantly… So in MatchMasters we are the number 3 guild on the LB, and were top 10 in the recent quarterly LB. I’d like to see a distribution of our six matches something like:
- 2-3 matches are top 10 Guilds
- 2-3 are top 30
- 1 per week is top 50
This creates variety for everyone. It gives the top guilds the odd easier day, so to speak, so less hardcore players can look at the scores and maybe take a breather, or newer members can go back to exploring for stones, whilst giving the lower but dedicated guilds a crack at the top ones now a few times a week for bonus points.
@sirrian is this something you can comment on please?
Just for a counterpoint, I actually do hope I play that “same group of top opponents”. Facing random guild #1042 just because they’re different doesn’t really appeal to me. In general, the top guilds are more active, more competitive, and more likely to have other forum members for some friendly rivalries and chatter. As for your analogy, yes, sports LEAGUES have the top face the bottom. But most sports leagues are limited to a small number of teams, and they use multiple leagues to separate teams of different levels, so your analogy is a bit off the mark. If you look closer at the sports league model, they’ll have a limited number of teams in the “majors” (or “premier”) pool of opponents you could be paired with, and then additional levels like “AAA” or “AA” (or “First Division” and “Second Division”).
So following that pattern, and having guilds put in groups and can play anybody in their group, that would make sense to me. For example, assuming a group size of 30, #1 could face #30 (the lowest ranked opponent in the group) but not #2000, since they’re simply not at the same level (group) as the others. Also, since these rankings (and thus the groups/pools) would change each week, it would ensure that the most active/competitive teams would get to play with each other. Whether the groups should be 20 or 50 or 200 teams is all just details/tweaking. Overall I would consider that sort of system a benefit rather than a problem like you indicate. But I’d love a dev comment on this too
I thought guilds could only be matched up to other guilds with around the same level of guild statues as them? Has this changed?
Based on that I would assume the battles are against those guild’s members, but maybe not?